Arab Liberals, Secularists Are Facing Jiha

March 18, 2010

The Extremists Urge Jihad against All Those Who Oppose Their
Views, Calling Them "Muslims in Name Only"

"Two weeks ago [Sheikh Nasser bin Suleiman Al-'Omar]
delivered a fervent address to an audience of his followers and
supporters, one all too similar to an inflammatory religious
sermon. The renowned sheikh is considered one of the [great] Muslim
preachers. He is among the prominent leaders of the Islamic
awakening movement, holds the titles 'sheikh' and 'doctor,' and
runs the religious Al-Moslim website [http://www.almoslim.net].
[In his address] he urged the impassioned youth [present] to raise
a jihad against the secularists and liberals in their own countries
instead of joining the jihad in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sheikh Dr.
[Al-'Omar] said, 'Young people come to me, yearning to set out for
Afghanistan or Iraq to join the jihad for the sake of Allah. I tell
them: 'Although these countries are indeed lands of jihad... do not
go there to wage jihad.' And so what will these youths, so
impassioned by his jihadi sermon, do now...? How will they vent
this [yearning]?

"[Don't worry, for] the sheikh does not leave his
followers in suspense. He wastes no time in directing them to a
superior alternative, which he calls 'the greatest jihad,' saying:
'Jihad is right here before you: jihad against the secularists and
liberals, who are Muslims in name only.' [In response to the
question of] how the youth are to carry out this jihad against the
secularists and liberals, Sheikh Dr. [Al-'Omar] replies: 'Each
according to his strength and ability'. Which is to say that all
possibilities are open to the youth, from jihad through the written
word to a jihad of invective, diatribe, and accusations of treason,
and also jihad by the sword.

"[As for the identity of] these secularists and
liberals, these Muslims in name only, whom Sheikh Dr. [Al-'Omar]
refers to in his address, they are any - especially those outside
of Saudi Arabia - who stand opposed to the sheikh and his
ideological, political, and social platform. They are the
intellectuals, philosophers, members of the media, and the
free-thinking authors who challenge the allegations of the
extremists. They are those who call for conciliatory religious
discourse among [Muslims] and with the outside world. Those who
encourage openness towards contemporary cultures, defend general
freedoms, and support women's rights, including [their right to
attain] positions or leadership... They are those who demand
changes in religious curricula, a renewal of religious discourse,
and the moderation of [preaching] in mosques in order to prevent
them from becoming political stages for campaigns of incitement
against anyone who is different. They are those who stand against
the religious violence that has spread throughout the region, and
who challenge flawed religious concepts... In the sheikh's opinion,
all of these people are Muslims in name only, against whom it is
permissible to carry out jihad."

"Silence in the Face of... [This] Incitement
Nullifies All the Efforts... to Propagate a Culture of Dialogue and
Human Rights"

"Sheikh Dr. [Al-'Omar's] address is an instigation of
violence... It is reminiscent of bin Laden's claims against Arab
thinkers and liberals four years ago, when he described them as
mocking religion and incited the youth against them. [The sheikh's
address] constitutes the same [sort of] incitement which can still
be heard on some of the television networks, whether expressed by
program-hosts or by guests, who sympathize with this same
narrow-minded idea and encourage the basest aspects of Arab
mentality. They fervently attack the liberal Arabs, and claim that
they are [foreign] agents and traitors because they support a
Western agenda and consistently criticize backward and fanatical
elements of Arabic culture.

"The danger of this call to jihad against secularists
and liberals is not limited to merely strengthening this violent
ideological infrastructure, or to reinforcing a culture of
extremism in the hearts of [already] agitated youth, or to
disseminating sentiments of hatred and factionalism among members
of the same society. The great danger intrinsic [to this call to
jihad] lies in leading additional youth astray, and entangling them
in harmful activities and foolish acts against those who disagree
with the views of their sheikhs...

"Silence in the face of these fanatical messages of
incitement nullifies all the efforts being made by governments of
the region to propagate a culture of dialogue and human rights and
to inure youth against extremist ideas. Therefore, it behooves all
intellectuals, members of the media, and enlightened religious
scholars to join forces in putting an end to this rampant ideology
by challenging it, refuting it, and subduing it. There can be no
jihad between countrymen, regardless of how different their
political or religious views may be. There is no difference between
statements which legitimize the murder of authors, intellectuals,
or artists by accusing them of heresy or apostatasy, and words of
incitement which invoke jihad against them for being Muslims in
name only. Both encourage hatred between members of the same
society and legitimize violence against a specific sector within
it."

The Sheikhs Should Urge Their Young Followers "to
the Worthiest [kind of] Jihad: that of Development, Education, and
Building, instead of... [Encouraging Them] to Destroy and
Kill"

"Those who accuse others of heresy know that by now
our society is sick and tired of their discourse, and therefore
condemns their desecration of mosques and their use of mosques for
political purposes and for [spreading] propaganda. This is why they
have adopted a new tactic of accusing liberals of religious
hypocrisy in order to justify jihad against them on jurisprudential
grounds. It is sad and distressing that those who are in charge of
preaching [in our society] have sunk to such a level of hatred for
free thinkers, and are attempting to settle their score with them
by using the term jihad against them.

"Hassan Salam wrote in the London paper
Al-Hayat... that one of the dogmatic religious scholars in
Saudi Arabia said: 'In the days of the Prophet, [the term] "Muslim
in name only" related to one who made outward shows of being a
Muslim, but was in his heart a non-believer. Later on, such a
person was called an infidel, and today he is called secular. The
secularists are the infidels and the Muslims in name only'.

"Calm yourselves, you preaching sheikhs. Why don't
you act like the Prophet Muhammad, who knew which of his Companions
were Muslims in name only, yet did not command to wage jihad
against them, and even preferred to live alongside them and treat
them with respect, leaving it to Allah to settle accounts with
them. One who bears the message of Islam and champions its values,
shouldn't he urge his young followers to the worthiest jihad, that
of development, education, and building, instead of [urging them
to] use their abilities to destroy and to kill? Why not compel them
to value life and respect their fellowman? Why not exhort them to
carry out spiritual jihad against the negative tendencies [of man]?
Why not open their eyes to the challenges of the times... and teach
them how to talk with and debate the opponents of [their] sheikhs
in a courteous manner, by making good arguments...?"

The Extremists Feel Threatened by the Liberal
Movement

"The preaching to jihad against liberals did not grow
in a vacuum. It is obvious that the liberal movement grew
increasingly active as the level of freedom of expression in Saudi
society increased, [and thus] became a target for its ideological
rivals.

"Now, in light of this inflammatory discourse
targeting the Arab liberals, how can we protect them? How can they
and their families feel safe? And how can we ensure that no
naïve youth will dare do them harm or act in violence against
them, thinking it a form of jihad permissible by shari'a?

"Both I and others have demanded in several articles
to dry up the fountainhead of extremist culture and all its
branches, and to make religious discourse more human by developing
it, and by opening it to [other] cultures of the world and to the
loftier goals of shari'a. I and many others interested in religious
reform have demanded that [the preaching] in mosques be moderated,
especially the Friday [sermons], and that it be forbidden to use
[these sermons] for illegal purposes - as they are used nowadays to
serve a narrow political agenda of private self-praising
propaganda, and for disseminating extremist ideas and incitement
against authors and intellectuals who oppose these preachers and
against [their] books and publications.

"I have demanded that the monopoly these preachers
hold over sermons in the mosques be broken. I also demanded that
changes be made to the religious curricula, based as they are on
one-sided thinking, on obscuring the human factor, and on a culture
of learning by rote. Likewise, I called for the education system to
be liberated from the control... of extremists. But these things
necessitate a long-term strategy, and that is why I believe the
time has come for Arab countries to adopt legislation which would
outlaw incitement to hatred, and enable free-thinkers to sue any
preacher in a mosque whose inciting sermon has caused them harm...
Jordan is the only country that has dared to stand up and counter
instigators of hate through laws which ban incitement and
accusations of heresy. This is a step worthy of encouragement.
Silence in the face of inflammatory speech is a grievous offense,
but allowing instigators to preach in mosques is an even greater
crime.

"The time has come to make it clear to all preachers
in mosques that declaring jihad is tantamount to declaring war,
something which rests in the authority of political rulers, rather
than sheikhs. A sheikh, even if he is one of high rank, does not
have the right to declare jihad, within the country or without.
Therefore, there is no evading the need for legislation to deal
with this issue, with the aim of preventing anarchy, protecting
human dignity, and ensuring the stability and safety of
society."